TWI414160B - Error correction in packet-based communication networks using data consistency checks - Google Patents

Abstract

Bit errors in packets of data that are communicated in a network such as a wireless network can be corrected by processes that do not require any overhead in the data such as conventional error-detection codes or redundant information such as conventional error-correction codes. A validation-set process compares corrupted data against values in a set of known valid values and selects one of the known valid values to replace the corrupted data. A consistency-check process uses data correlation characteristics of two or more parameters to determine if values obtained from a packet are consistent with one another. If not, values are changed to make them consistent.

Description

Error Correction Technology for Packetized Communication Network Using Data Consistency Check Technical field of invention

The present invention is generally related to data communication techniques and, more specifically, to devices for correcting errors in damaged data in a data communication network.

Technical background of the invention

Data packets transmitted over a network such as a wireless network are often susceptible to damage by multiple different organizations, including noise and signals that interfere with communication but cannot be received simultaneously. Therefore, the data arriving at the receiver may be different from the corresponding data leaving the transmitter. Information such as cyclic redundancy codes can be used and the data can be detected together. This type of information is often referred to as an error detection code. A variety of different types of redundant information, commonly referred to as error correction codes, can be included to detect and correct errors. A variety of different communication techniques can also be used to correct errors, including techniques that allow the receiver to request retransmission of the packet whenever an error is detected in a packet, or cause the sender to send the packet several times and allow reception. The technique used to obtain corrected data from the plurality of packets.

Unfortunately, such known techniques for correcting errors in received data require additional processing capacity to store or deliver the required redundant data. What is needed is a method that corrects errors without the need for additional additional content or redundant material, such as error correction codes.

Summary of the invention

It is an object of the present invention to provide data correction techniques in a packet-type communication network that does not require additional additional content or redundant material, such as error correction codes.

According to an aspect of the invention, an error in a received data packet will be corrected by utilizing the consistency of the data representing the two or more specified parameters included in the two or more packets. Corresponding features of a plurality of specified parameters are performed, and if the check indicates that the data is inconsistent, a parameter is selected from the two or more specified parameters, and the two or more specified parameters are based on the description data An error model of the data corruption probability in the packet is represented by the data having the highest probability of damage, and the data representing the selected parameter is modified such that the data representing the two or more specified parameters can be consistent according to the inspection.

The various features and preferred embodiments of the present invention are understood by the description of the invention, The following discussion and the drawings are intended to be illustrative only, and should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention.

Brief description of the schema

Figure 1 shows an exemplary communication network.

Figure 2 is a flow chart showing a method for implementing error correction techniques using array valid parameter values.

Figure 3 is a flow chart showing a method of implementing error correction techniques using data consistency checks.

Figure 4 is a schematic block diagram showing an apparatus for practicing various aspects of the present invention.

Detailed description of the preferred embodiment A. Preface 1. Example communication network

Figure 1 shows an exemplary communication network incorporating various aspects of the present invention. Communication network 60 includes communication medium 30, such as an electrical, optical or electromagnetic communication path, and associated devices for transmitting and receiving data over a communication path. The communication medium 30 is substantially compliant with any standard, including Ethernet (described in the IEEE 802.3 standard) or WiFi (described in the IEEE 802.11 standard), utilizing, for example, Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) a communication protocol. However, the invention is not limited to any particular agreement or communication standard.

Referring to Figure 1, the sources 11, 12, 13 provide digital data to one or more transmitters 21, 22 that configure the data as packets and send the packets to the communication medium 30. Preferably, the transmitters 21, 22 include some type of error detection code (EDC) in the packets, such as a cyclic redundancy code (CRC) or a co-located bit. The receivers 41, 42, 43 receive the packets from the communication medium 30 and apply any desired form of conventional error detection or error correction. The data from the packets that are affected by conventional error correction techniques can be passed to another device, such as device 51, to process the packet data as needed for certain applications.

For example, source 11 may provide encoded audio material to transmitter 21, which is an access point (AP) in a wireless network for transmission to receiver 43 via electromagnetic communication medium 30. The data packets received by the receiver 43 can be processed according to any desired conventional error detection and correction techniques and subsequently passed to the device 51 which is an audio decoder and audio playback system. For example, various aspects of the invention may be implemented in receiver 43 or device 51.

B. Error correction technology

Error correction can be implemented in a number of different ways, such as processing circuitry in the receiver of communication network 60. According to this example, a receiver in the network, such as receiver 43, receives a data packet representing a plurality of parameters and applies an error to data representing one or more of the plurality of parameters. Correct the program to correct for any errors that may exist. Two error correction procedures are discussed below.

1. A set of valid parameter values a) Basic instructions for the procedure

An error correction program, which is called a confirmation set program, can correct an error in a material representing a specified parameter of the group by comparing the damage data with a value in a set of known valid values of a set of specified parameters, and selecting the error One of the known effective values is substituted for the damaged data.

Preferably, the data collection process is performed only when a representation of the data corruption occurs. In essence, any technique can be used to detect data corruption. Examples include techniques for checking CRC or parity bits.

Preferably, the gap between the damaged data and the values of the set of valid parameter values can be used to select a permutation value that minimizes the measure of the gap. A variety of different metrics can be used, such as Hamming distance, which is a count of the number of different bits between two binary digits of the same length. Using this measure, the effective parameter value in the set of values with the minimum Hamming distance from the value in the damaged data is selected as the permutation value because it is considered the most likely candidate for the original undamaged value. If the set of valid parameter values causes a large gap between the effective values of the set, it is less likely that a predetermined number of bit errors incorrectly change one valid parameter value to another effective value, thereby improving Correct the reliability of this procedure for errors.

This validation set procedure requires that the number of values in the set of valid parameter values be less than the total number of values represented by the data representing the specified parameter. For example, if a packet material representing a specified parameter has K binary value data elements or bits, the data elements can represent N = 2 ^K different values. The number of values M in the set of valid parameter values must be less than N. Preferably, M is substantially smaller than N, for example, M< N.

b) Obtain the value of the group

The set of valid values can be obtained in a number of different ways. However, the invention is not limited to any particular manner. According to one approach, a set of completed valid values can be retrieved from one or more packets that convey initialization information. This initialization information may be generated by the digital data source 11, 12, 13 or the transmitters 21, 22 when the power is turned on or initialized for operation and then propagated to all of the receivers in the communication network 60, or when the power is turned on or Upon initialization for operation, it may be subject to the requirements of the receivers 41, 42, 43 in the network 60.

According to another aspect, at least some of the set of valid values can be obtained from data obtained directly by the device performing the error correction procedure. For example, all or some of the valid values can be recorded in a permanent storage, such as a read-only memory (ROM) with receivers 41, 42, 43 and when the receiver's power is turned on or initialized for operation. The processing circuitry in the receiver is used to construct a set of full or partial valid parameter values.

According to another method, the set of valid values is constructed incrementally from the information obtained from the packet data in which the data was not corrupted. If a CRC or other component is used to determine if a packet is received without loss of damage, it can be assumed that the data representing the specified parameter in an undamaged packet represents a valid value, and if the value does not yet exist in the set of values Then add it to it.

c) instance

The above confirmation set procedure can be used to correct errors in the data that essentially represent any of the parameters (communication control parameters and application parameters). The so-called 〝 application parameter 〞 represents a value used by a particular application of the packet data, such as an audio or multimedia decoding and playback system. The so-called 〝 communication control parameter 〞 indicates the value used by one or more devices in the communication network 60 to control the transmission and reception of packets. An example of a procedure for correcting an error in passing a communication control parameter in a control header conforming to an IEEE 802.11 packet will be described in the following paragraphs. Additional details regarding the transfer of information in this header can be obtained from the article "IEEE 802.11, Part 11: Wireless LAN Media Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specification (1999)".

IEEE 802.11 conforms to the MAC header of the packet to convey important parameters, including the 48-bit identifier of the source and the receiver for the packet. In some cases, it can also convey an identification of the network to which the packet belongs. The valid values of the device identifiers are the network addresses of the devices in the communication network. Errors in such network addresses can be corrected, such as by using one of the methods shown in Figure 2, as described below.

Referring to FIG. 2, step S11 receives a data packet, and step S12 checks the CRC in the packet to determine whether data has been corrupted in the received packet. If no damage is detected, step S13 extracts the network address from the MAC header of the packet, and adds each address to a list of valid address values or a valid address value, if The address does not exist in it. If it is determined in step S12 that there is data corruption, step S14 calculates a gap metric (e.g., Hamming distance) between the network address indicated by the damaged data and the known effective address of the set of valid address values. Step S15 determines whether a gap metric has been calculated for all values in the set of valid address values. If the gap measure has not been calculated for all values, step S16 proceeds to the next value in the set of values and returns to step S14, which calculates the gap measure for the next value. Step S15 can also check if the calculated difference is zero, and if it is zero, immediately skip steps S17 and S18 because it is known that there is no need to correct the data representing the network address. The error detected in step S12 is clearly related to other information in the received packet.

When it is determined in step S15 that the gap metrics have been calculated for all of the values in the set of values, step S17 determines whether the smallest metric in all of the gap metrics calculated in step S14 is less than a threshold. Empirical testing suggests that the effective choice for this threshold is no more than 8 bits, which is spread between address data of no more than 3 bytes. If the minimum difference is not less than the threshold, the network address may belong to a different network or the data corruption exceeds the correctable amount of data; therefore, no correction is made. If the minimum gap is less than the threshold, the damage condition is corrected by selecting the value corresponding to the minimum gap from the set of valid parameter values, and the selected value is used to replace the corrupted data from the packet.

This acknowledgment set procedure is quite effective for a typical network because the network addresses of all devices in the network are quite sparse in the total address space. For example, 802.11 MAC network address parameter is a total address space ²⁴⁸ of the unique addresses in a 48 yuan number. A typical 802.11 compliant network typically has fewer than 100 devices; therefore, if the addresses of the various devices are quite different from each other in terms of the number of different bits, the above described program should be able to operate quite efficiently.

If the calculation of the gap measure is continuous or nearly continuous for all values in the set of values, the operational complexity of such an error correction procedure is proportional to the M values of the set of valid parameters.

2. Consistency check a) Basic instructions for the procedure

Another error correction procedure, referred to as a consistency check procedure, uses data-related features of two or more parameters to determine whether values obtained from packet data representing the two or more parameters match each other and if they do not match The data is changed for a selected parameter to make the values consistent. An error model describing the probability of data corruption in the packets can be used to select the parameter represented by the data with a high probability of corruption for correction.

Preferably, this error correction procedure is performed on the data only when a data corruption condition is indicated. In essence, any technique can be used to detect if there is data corruption. Examples include techniques for checking CRC or parity bits.

b) instance

This consistency check procedure can be used to correct errors in two or more different parameter data in the same packet (in-packet correction) or in the same or different parameter data in different packets (inter-packet correction). Several examples will be explained below.

(1) Inter-packet correction

In many packetized networks including IEEE 802.11 compliant networks, each packet has an identification parameter, such as a serial number that is incremented by each subsequent unique packet sent by the intended transmitter. If the identification parameter of the current packet is the same as the identification parameter of the previous packet and the two packets are sent by the same sender, then the current packet must be a resent version of the previous packet, unless any one or two of the packets The identification parameters of the person are impaired.

In addition, if the packets have retry parameters indicating whether the packet is a resent version of a previous packet, as in the case of 802.11 compliant packets, the retry parameters in the current packet should be the same as the current and previous packets. The result of a comparison between the identification parameters is consistent. For example, if any of the following is true, an inconsistency condition is detected: (1) the identification parameter of the current packet is the same, and the retry parameter of the current packet indicates that it is not a resend version; or 2) The identification parameters of the current packet are not the same, and the retry parameter of the current packet indicates that it is a resend version. If either condition exists, the retry parameter in the current packet or the identification parameter in the current or previous packet has been compromised. A correction should be made to match the three parameter values.

If the consistency check for the IEEE 802.11-compliant packet sequence number and the retry parameter fails, it is possible that the sequence number in the previous packet has been corrupted so that the previous packet should have the sequence number x, but since it is corrupted, it is received. The time is x+1, or the serial number in the current packet has been damaged, so the current packet should have the sequence number x, but since it is damaged, it is x-1 when received. In either case, the current packet may be misinterpreted as a resent version of the previous packet. It can be shown that the probability of this type of error causing the current packet to be misinterpreted as a resent version of the previous packet is slightly less than 1.0 ^* BER, where BER is the probability of any damage to the location element, assuming that the data is corrupted. The organization operates according to a random bit error model. It can be shown that if the wrong organization tends to cause bit errors in the video, this probability is quite small.

The probability of a one-bit retry parameter is equal to 1.0 BER; therefore, if the error-inducing mechanism tends to cause random bit errors, relying on the sequence number to correct the retry compared to relying on the retry parameter to correct the sequence number The parameters have few or no advantages. However, if the bit error occurs in the cluster, the problem of destroying the serial number is less likely to produce a pseudo-equalization between the serial numbers of the two packets, and relying on the comparison of the serial numbers to correct any errors in the retry parameters. There is an advantage. This observation is quite useful because the empirical results have shown that the bit error in the actual network tends to occur in the news.

If the packets include an error detection code, such as a CRC, an error correction procedure can determine if the current or previous packet has been corrupted. If this additional information indicates that the previous packet was not compromised, the chance of serial number corruption in the current packet is reduced to approximately 0.5 ^* BER. Since the probability of damage to the one-bit retry parameter is still 1.0 ^* BER, it would be advantageous to rely on a comparison of the sequence numbers to correct any errors in the retry parameters, even if the error causes the mechanism to tend to cause random Bit error.

For many packets in the network, another consistency check may be performed for retransmission, including an IEEE 802.11 compliant network packet with an error detection code such as CRC, which is a hash type of packet material. An identical hash of the two packets implies that the data for the two packets is of the same probability. When the hash becomes longer, the probability is close to 1.0. When the error detection codes of the two packets are the same and the code indicates that the data in the first packet is damaged but no data is destroyed in the second packet, the data in the second packet may be used to replace the corresponding data in the first packet.

(2) Correction within the packet

In many communication protocols, such as those used in IEEE 802.11 compliant networks, a packet has one or more control parameters whose value specifies how the other parameters in the packet are interpreted. An example is a bootstrap flag in the IEEE 802.11 protocol that specifies how network address parameters in the MAC header are interpreted. The MAC header conveys three parameters that represent the source of the digital data, the intended destination, and the network address of the access point (AP). Due to the construction of the MAC header, the source, destination, and AP address parameters are not located at a fixed location on the header. Conversely, the MAC header has four address fields, called address 1, address 2, address 3, and address 4, which collectively convey the source, destination, and AP address as shown in Table I. A function that guides the value of a flag. The IEEE 802.11 compliant receiver in the network uses the value of the pilot flag to determine the appropriate bit location of the source, destination, and AP address in the MAC header of the given packet.

The bootstrap flag has two bits that indicate the mapping of the device network address to the four address fields that are displayed. The first column in the table indicates a special mode that is not used in the infrastructure network. It is a typical configuration of IEEE 802.11 compliant networks where all packets must pass through an AP. The second column represents the control parameters being sent by the AP to receive a packet on the intended destination. The third column indicates the control parameters of a packet being transmitted to the AP. The last column in the table represents a relay mode, while RA and TA represent intermediate relay APs that are rarely used.

If a packet is damaged, it is likely that such damage will cause the error to be passed into the boot flag or to any address parameter. In order to correct for these types of errors, a consistency check procedure can use the validation set procedure to correct any errors in the address parameters and then derive from which address field the AP network address appears in. The correction value of the leading flag. If the pilot flag has any other value, it can be corrected by replacing it with the derived value.

Referring to Table I, it can be seen that the appearance of the AP address in various combinations of the address field implies a value of the leading flag, as shown in Table II. For example, if a known AP address is found only in the Address 2 field, it can be found from Table I that the 01 system implies a correction value for the leading flag. If the data in the packet representing the leading flag parameter does not have this value, it can be replaced by the derived value 01. In this case, the derived correction values are represented by the third column of Table II. Similarly, if the known AP address is found only in the address 3 field or only in the address 1 field, the leading flag parameter value is corrected to 00 or 10, as in the second column of Table II. Shown in the fifth column.

If a known AP address is found in the Address 2 and Address 3 fields, one of the two conditions may exist, as shown in the first and second columns of Table I, if the source is an AP. Since this type of address can be generated in either of the two conditions, the value of the leading flag is not inferred unless the ambiguous condition can be resolved. A solution can be achieved by assuming that the network is the underlying network, in which no special mode is used; therefore, 01 can be inferred to be the correction value of the leading flag, as shown in the second column of Table I. This condition can be represented by the fourth column in Table II.

If a known AP address is found in the Address 1 and Address 3 fields, if the source is an AP, one of the two conditions may exist, as shown in the first and third columns of Table I. This ambiguity can be resolved by assuming that the network is the underlying network, where no special mode is used; therefore, it can be inferred that 10 is the correction value of the pilot flag, as shown in the third column of Table I. This condition can be represented by the sixth column in Table II.

If a known AP address is found in the Address 1 and Address 2 fields, one of three conditions may exist, as shown in the second, third, and fourth columns of Table 1. This ambiguity cannot be resolved; therefore, the correction value cannot be inferred for the pilot flag. This condition can be represented by the seventh column in Table II.

If the known AP address cannot be found in any of the three address fields, the correction value of the leading flag is not defined. It is possible that the packet belongs to another network and the device network address of the network is unknown. This condition is indicated by the first column of Table II.

Form II

The basic principles of this calibration procedure can be extended to other conditions where a particular numerical or numerical pattern implies a correction value for a given parameter.

(3) Method

The steps in one method can be used for inter-packet and intra-packet correction, as shown in the steps in Figure 3. Referring to FIG. 3, step S21 receives one or more data packets, and step S22 checks the CRC in one or more received packets to determine whether data is corrupted. If no damage is detected, steps S23 to S26 are skipped. If it is determined in step S22 that the data is corrupted, step S23 performs a consistency check of the data representing the two or more parameters. This consistency can be checked for data representing parameters in a single packet or in two or more packets. If it is determined in step S24 that the checked data is identical, steps S25 and S26 are skipped. If the data representing the selected parameters are not consistent, then step S25 uses an error model to select parameters with a higher probability of damage, and step S26 modifies the data representing the selected parameters so that the data now becomes compliant.

c. Implementation plan

A device incorporating various aspects of the present invention can be implemented in a number of different ways, including software executed by a computer, or other devices including more specialized components, such as digital signal processing coupled to components similar to those used in general purpose computers. (DSP) circuit. Figure 4 is a schematic block diagram showing an apparatus 70 for practicing various aspects of the present invention. Processor 72 provides computing resources. The RAM 73 is a system random access memory (RAM) used by the processor 72 for processing operations. ROM 74 represents some form of permanent storage, such as a program for storing operating device 70 and a read only memory (ROM) that may be used to perform various aspects of the present invention. I/O control 75 represents an interface circuit for receiving and transmitting signals using communication channels 76, 77. In the illustrated embodiment, all of the major system components are coupled to busbar 71, which represents more than one physical or logical busbar; however, a busbar architecture is not required to practice the present invention.

In embodiments implemented by general purpose computer systems, additional components may be included to interface with devices such as a keyboard or mouse, displays, and to control storage devices 78, such as magnetic tapes or magnetic disks or optical media, having storage media. The storage medium can be used to record instruction programs for operating systems, utilities, and applications, and includes programs for implementing various aspects of the present invention.

The functions of implementing various aspects of the present invention can be performed by components implemented in a variety of different ways, including discrete logic components, integrated circuits, one or more ASICs, and/or program control processors. The manner in which such components are implemented is not critical to the invention.

The software implementation of the present invention can be conveyed by a variety of different machine readable media, such as baseband or modulated communication paths from ultrasound to ultraviolet frequency spectrum, or storage media that utilize any recording technique to convey information, including tape, Magnetic sheets, or magnetic discs, optical or optical discs, and detectable marks on media including paper.

11. . . source

12. . . source

13. . . source

twenty one. . . Transmitter

twenty two. . . Transmitter

30. . . Communication media

41. . . receiver

42. . . receiver

43. . . receiver

51. . . device

60. . . Communication network

70. . . Device

71. . . Busbar

72. . . processor

73. . . Random access memory (RAM)

74. . . Read only memory (ROM)

75. . . I/O control

76. . . Communication channel

77. . . Communication channel

78. . . Storage device

S11~S16. . . step

S21~S26. . . step

Figure 1 shows an exemplary communication network.

Figure 2 is a flow chart showing a method for implementing error correction techniques using array valid parameter values.

Figure 3 is a flow chart showing a method of implementing error correction techniques using data consistency checks.

Figure 4 is a schematic block diagram showing an apparatus for practicing various aspects of the present invention.

S21. . . Receive one or more packets

S22. . . Is there an error?

S23. . . Check parameter consistency

S24. . . Is it consistent?

S25. . . Select parameters for correction

S26. . . Correct selected parameters

Claims (12)

A method for correcting errors in data transmitted by a communication network comprising one or more transmitters and one or more receivers, wherein the method comprises the steps of: receiving one or more data packets, each of which Include data representing a plurality of parameters; checking for consistency of data representing two or more specific parameters included in the one or more data packets, the step utilizing correlation characteristics of the two or more specific parameters Performing, wherein the consistency is checked using a program independent of the error correction code, and wherein the specific parameters are communication control parameters or application parameters; if the checking step indicates that the data is inconsistent, then And selecting, by an error model of the probability of data corruption in the data packet during the transmission of the packet, selecting a parameter represented by the data having the highest probability of damage from the two or more specific parameters; and modifying the data representing the selected parameter, The data representing the two or more specific parameters can be made consistent according to the inspection step. The method of claim 1, wherein the interrelationship characteristics are reflected in a set of special numerical patterns of the plurality of the particular parameters and a set of corresponding values of the selected parameters. The method of claim 2, wherein each of the transmitters and each of the receivers has a network address; the two or more specific parameters include a network address from which one of the one or more data packets is sourced, One of the one or more data packets Determining a transmitter's network address, one of the one or more data packets specifying a receiver's network address, and indicating whether the one or more data packets are intended for the designated receiver or the designation a boot flag of the transmitter; and the lead flag is the selected parameter. The method of claim 1, wherein: the one or more data packets each include error detection information; the method includes the step of using the error detection information to determine whether a different data packet has an error; and if the individual If the data packet is damaged, the steps of performing consistency check, selecting parameters, and modifying the data are performed. A storage medium recording a program executable by a device for performing a method for correcting errors in data transmitted by a communication network including one or more transmitters and one or more receivers, Wherein the method comprises the steps of: receiving one or more data packets, each of which includes data representing a plurality of parameters; and checking consistency of data representative of two or more specific parameters included in the one or more data packets The step is performed by utilizing the interrelationship characteristics of the two or more specific parameters, wherein the consistency is checked using a program independent of the error correction code, and wherein the specific parameters are communication control parameters or application parameters If the inspection step indicates that the information is inconsistent, the probability of data loss in the data packet during the transmission of the packets is described. An error model selecting a parameter represented by the data having the highest probability of damage from the two or more specified parameters; and modifying the data representative of the selected parameter to cause the two or more specific parameters to be represented The data can be consistent according to the inspection steps. The medium of claim 5, wherein the interrelationship characteristics are reflected in a set of special numerical patterns of the plurality of the specific parameters and a set of corresponding values of the selected parameters. The medium of claim 6, wherein each of the transmitters and each of the receivers has a network address; the two or more specific parameters include a network address of one of the one or more data packets. And one of the one or more data packets specifying a network address of the transmitter, one of the one or more data packets specifying a network address of the receiver, and indicating whether the one or more data packets are A lead flag intended for the designated receiver or the designated transmitter; and the leading flag is the selected parameter. The medium of claim 5, wherein: the one or more data packets each include error detection information; the method includes the step of using the error detection information to determine whether an additional data packet has an error; and if the individual If the data packet is damaged, the steps of performing consistency check, selecting parameters, and modifying the data are performed. A device for correcting errors in data transmitted by a communication network including one or more transmitters and one or more receivers, wherein The apparatus includes: means for receiving one or more data packets, each data packet including data representing a plurality of parameters; and utilizing a correlation characteristic of the two or more specified parameters to check that the representative is included in the one or more A component of the consistency of the data of the two or more specified parameters in the data packet, wherein the consistency is checked using a program independent of the error correction code, and wherein the specific parameters are communication control parameters or applications a parameter; a component for selecting a parameter, wherein one of the two or more specified parameters is selected from the two or more specified parameters according to an error model describing a probability of data corruption in the data packet during the transmission of the packets a parameter, wherein if the checking step indicates that the data is inconsistent, the selecting component performs its function; and the data representing the selected parameter is modified to enable the data representing the two or more specific parameters to be based on This check becomes a consistent component. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the interrelationship characteristics are reflected in a set of special numerical patterns of the plurality of the specific parameters and a set of corresponding values of the selected parameters. The device of claim 10, wherein each of the transmitters and each of the receivers has a network address; the two or more specific parameters include a network address of one of the one or more data packets. And one of the one or more data packets specifying a network address of the transmitter, one of the one or more data packets specified a network address of the receiver and a guidance flag indicating whether the one or more data packets are intended for the designated receiver or the designated transmitter; and the leading flag is the selected parameter. The device of claim 9, wherein: the one or more data packets each comprise error detection information; the device includes means for using the error detection information to determine whether an other data packet has an error; The individual data packets are damaged, and the components for performing consistency checks, selecting parameters, and modifying the data perform their functions.